I for one am sick and tired of being called a terrorist (which is the massively-coordinated MSM/Democrat talking point du jour) from people who are afraid to call actual terrorists “terrorists” … Not to mention by people who actually associate with actual terrorists (Barack Obama and Bill Ayers, just for starters). Sarah Palin points out that “if we were real domestic terrorists, shoot, President Obama would be wanting to pal around with us, wouldn’t he?” It’s disgusting to claim that people who simply want the government to act with responsibility and restraint in regards to the budget and our civil liberties are “terrorists” and “holding the nation hostage” (especially from the so-called self-described “party of civility”), and only serves to prove that Gerald Seymour had it backwards when he said that “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.”

After listening to Democrat politicians and the Democrat propaganda wing of the mainstream media continue to paint any opposition to higher taxes, higher spending, higher debt, and their Glorious Chairman Obama as “violent,” “extremist,” “racist” and “terrorist;” I think we can be forgiven to be a little leery about Obama’s latest strategy to combat violent extremism. (H/T: WZ)

Local communities, not Washington, are best suited to counter violent extremism, according to a new national strategy the Obama administration took more than a year to produce. The strategy pointedly does not focus on threats from Muslim extremism.

Of course not. And I doubt very much if it focuses on SEIU thugs or Ayers types either.

Obama’s surrogates and apologists have never let up on the smears that opposition to Dear Leader is racially-based, regardless of and completely separate to the issues pushed by Obama and his abysmal job performance. Many of these groups take their marching orders and talking points directly from the top, while Obama himself stays above the fray. Well, now Obama himself has pushed this despicable lie.

…the brutally honest, be it absurd assessment can be found in Family of Freedom: Presidents and African-Americans in the White House. Now according to the book, at a private White House dinner in May of 2010, the president explained to his guests that quote, “race was probably a key component in the rising opposition to his presidency from conservatives, especially right-wing activists in the anti-incumbent Tea Party Movement.” At the same function against argued that the Tea Party has simply angry that a black man is president. Now rather than dispute that notion, President Obama agreed and reportedly called racism the quote, “subterranean agenda of the movement.” So without a shred of evidence, the president has no problem labeling the Tea Party as racist. But in recent years, he’s been ultimately quick to forgive racially insensitive remarks made by some on the left. …

A lot of Democrats chose to retire last year rather than have their asses handed to them in the election. I was not strongly in favor of this. Sure, I wanted the bums out of Congress as much as the next guy, but I didn’t want them to retire. I wanted them to LOSE. I wanted them to try their hardest, I wanted them to fight to keep their perks, I wanted them to want it bad, and I wanted them to go down in flames. Still, watching them bow to the inevitable and chicken out was a preferable “Plan B” to having them run for reelection and WIN. (Seriously, Nevada, what the Hell is wrong with you? Although I still think Reid might have lost in a fair fight, which the 2010 Nevada Senatorial election clearly was not. But I digress.)

The Fix — North Dakota Democratic Senator Kent Conrad announced today that he will not seek reelection, creating a potentially prime pickup opportunity for Republicans in a GOP-leaning state. “After months of consideration, I have decided not to seek reelection in 2012,” Conrad said in a letter to constituents. “There are serious challenges facing our state and nation, like a $14 trillion debt and America’s dependence on foreign oil. It is more important I spend my time and energy trying to solve these problems than to be distracted by a campaign for reelection.” (H/T: RightNetwork and Pi Guy)

Actually, Kent, I’m pretty sure your party is the one creating and exacerbating the challenges currently facing our nation, which is why you know that you’d lose if you ran.

Most people have focused on the Republicans’ gains in the Congress (particularly, the takeover of the House of Representatives) in the 2010 midterm elections. Less discussed, but at least as important, are the gains made by the GOP in controlling governors and state legislatures. Combining the before and after maps from the National Conference of State Legislatures, we get this “throbbing” GIF:

In some ways, the political situation post-Nov. 2 is even worse for the Democrats than it may appear. … [W]hat’s really bad for President Obama and his party is the likely impact of the 2010 Census and ensuing House of Representatives reapportionment on the distribution of votes in the 2012 Electoral College. … [S]ince the U.S. population continues to flow South and West, reapportionment will probably add House seats in red states and subtract them in blue states.

As it happens, all six of these states [gaining electoral votes], except for North Carolina, will have Republican governors next year, and all six, except for Nevada, will have Republican state legislatures. Texas … will gain 4 electoral votes, according to projections from preliminary Census data… The other gainers – one vote each – include Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nevada, South Carolina and Utah. … Meanwhile, eight states that usually go blue in presidential elections – Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Minnesota – are projected to lose one electoral vote each. …

So, assuming the GOP establishment actually obeys the voters (unlike the Dems, who are merely infuriated that the voters aren’t obeying them) and the Tea Party and other concerned citizens keep up their interest (and keep both parties’ feet to the fire), things could look very good for the GOP in 2012. And, more importantly, America; because it’s not just about putting the GOP back in charge but also about changing the GOP – If the GOP continue their big government ways from the last decade, don’t expect their resurgence to be as strong nor as long-lived. (H/T some links: C2)

The voting is over, but the counting and recounting are still ongoing in some areas. The results of the election were pretty much what I had expected, but far from what I had hoped. Anyway, here’s yet another collection of stories about vote fraud…

Ohio: A Massillon poll worker’s car was stolen with poll materials inside. Like some of the other links in this series, this isn’t necessarily related to voter fraud – but, when there are so many incidents…

PajamasMedia — The turnout at its inaugural rally wasn’t great – only 100 activists showed up – but Israelis displaying piles of tea bags and “Say No to Obama” signs were still an unusual and interesting sight. The newly anointed Israeli Tea Party movement has adopted the symbols of the American Tea Party movement to express their dissatisfaction with both the Middle East policy and the economic philosophy of the Obama administration. But the focus of the inaugural event was addressed to both Washington and Jerusalem – it was a call for the U.S. president to stop pressuring Israel on the issue of renewing a settlement freeze, as well as a message to the Israeli government to resist that pressure. Said Likud MK Danny Danon, a member of the group of Likud activists behind the Tea Party initiative: “We are here today to send a very clear message to Mr. Obama: Stop bullying our prime minister!” …

This is not too surprising a development; after all, one of the defining things about the American Tea Party is their aversion to government pork.

Although the GOP’s takeover of the House looks inevitable (barring massive fraud, of course), not many people seriously expect the GOP to capture the Senate as well. It’s not impossible, but it’s not likely. The reason for that is that Senators serve six-year terms (as opposed to the two-year terms served by Representatives); so in any given election year, only a third of the Senate is up for re-election. And, this year, the particular third that’s up for re-election isn’t the most favorable for the GOP – the Congressmen most vulnerable to challenge are those Democrats who were elected in 2006 and 2008, in normally conservative districts, who managed to ride the anti-Bush or Obama hopey-changey coattails to win their seats. Those are the candidates most vulnerable in the House; but in the Senate, those candidates won’t be up for re-election until 2012 and 2014. This is why it’s vital for the GOP, the Tea Party, conservatives, independents, and so forth to keep up the momentum in the future that’s fueling them today. Because the same momentum that’s going to cost some Democrat Senators their jobs next week could cost even more Democrats their jobs in years to come.

In a related story, which can be classified as a “feel-good” story or an “if only!” story, The Raw Story* reports that if the full Senate really were all up for re-election this year, according to polls, the GOP would likely win overwhelmingly. Not just the sixty seats required to break any Democrat filibuster, but possibly even the sixty-seven required to override a Presidential veto. (The latter point wouldn’t matter unless the House won a similar majority.)

(Mainstream media: This highly-diverse crowd are the people complaining about the racist lack of minorities in the Tea Party.) The picture above is Barack Obama mingling with the apparently all-white members of the White House press corps (which is not pronounced “corpse”, Mister President). Just another reminder, as if the non-diverse lineup of MSNBC and the pale editorial board of The New York Times weren’t reminder enough, of the deliberately dishonest double-standards rampant in the media. And, in another case of the mask slipping off and revealing the truth underneath, prominent black activist, Mary Frances Berry (Professor of American Social Thought and History, U. Penn.) admitted this at the Politico (H/T Jim Hoft, GatewayPundit):

Tainting the tea party movement with the charge of racism is proving to be an effective strategy for Democrats. There is no evidence that tea party adherents are any more racist than other Republicans, and indeed many other Americans. But getting them to spend their time purging their ranks and having candidates distance themselves should help Democrats win in November. Having one’s opponent rebut charges of racism is far better than discussing joblessness.

Again, this comes as no surprise to many of us, but in the last few years it’s amazing how many of the people on the left are admitting to such things openly.

PajamasMedia and Hot Air both have the story about the “tragic” inability of the GOP incumbent, Senator Bob Bennett – a progressive “compassionate” conservative who supported the TARP bailouts – to even make it through Utah’s GOP convention to receive the party’s nomination for the general election.

Instead, GOPers will choose between attorney Mike Lee (R) and business consultant Tim Bridgewater (R), who will advance to a third ballot. If neither candidate receives 60% of the vote, they will face off in a June 22 primary. … Bennett, the 3-term incumbent with a largely conservative record, is the first victim of an angry GOP primary electorate, which is upset with his votes over TARP legislation and his work with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) to try and forge a health care consensus. He had been targeted by the conservative Club for Growth, which did not back a specific rival but urged delegates to vote against the incumbent.

I do not get excited, although some do, about Democratic incumbents losing primaries and/or declining to run for re-election. I want to see them try to run on their records and lose. Badly. By dropping out of their races, they allow Democratic “fresh blood” to run for their seats; Democrats who can claim to be “outsiders” and aren’t automatically tainted by their association with Obama and his Obaminations. By dropping out of their races, the incumbent Democrats are increasing the likelihood that their seats will remain Democratic after the 2010 elections.

On the other hand, when GOP Senators have spent too much time in DC, “gone native”, and no longer reflect their roots or their constituents, I am quite pleased to see them replaced by newcomers who are more likely to hold GOP seats (and more likely to defeat socialist Democrat incumbents). In many cases, there’s very little difference between some current Republicans in Congress and the Democrats they’re supposed to oppose. The Tea Party protesters, voters, and candidates are sending messages to members of both parties. Whereas the American Democratic Party has abandoned all pretense to supporting America or Democracy, and have for decades been the party of large, intrusive government, the GOP is supposed to be the party of smaller government and fiscal responsibility. However, even those Republicans who start off their careers espousing such aims usually “grow in office” after a few terms and become poster boys for term limits. It’s always a good idea to replace incumbents (of either party) who’ve outstayed their welcome; in this election it’s particularly important to remove Obama’s control over the Congress from a party which has abandoned all pretenses at moderation and accountability – but it’s also important to replace them with politicians who will represent the nation’s best interests.

Replacing the incumbent Democratic socialists with younger and more energetic socialists is not in the country’s best interest – but neither will it do us any good to turn over the Congress to a bunch of “me-too” Republican mavericks who are anxious to “reach across the aisle” in order to get nice things said about them in The Washington Post and The New York Times. A lot of current office holders need to go, and they don’t all have “(D)” after their names.

(H/T: WeaselZippers.) All of the proven racist epithets, calls to violence, and actual violence at Town Hall meetings and Tea Parties has been perpetrated by the Left and directed at the Right. The most inflammatory writings on-line also come from the Left. And yet the media, still with its head up its collective arse, continues to decry the anger and “un-American” hatred coming from those who oppose Obama and simply want to exercise their (formerly) Constitutional rights to patriotic dissent.